Using Program Evaluation Methodology to Identify Possible Program Outcomes for Tree City USA and...
-
Upload
arbor-day-foundation -
Category
Environment
-
view
85 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Using Program Evaluation Methodology to Identify Possible Program Outcomes for Tree City USA and...
Using Program Evaluation Methodology to Identify Possible Program Outcomes for Tree City USA and Tree Campus USARaija Bushnell Haley RitgerBurney Fischer
School of Public and Environmental Affairs
Indiana University
• Recognition program established in 1976– “Participating communities have
demonstrated a commitment to caring for and managing their public trees.”1
• 3400+ U.S. communities participate and meet the requirements:1,2
1. Tree board or dept.
2. Community tree ordinance
3. $2/capita urban forestry spending
4. Arbor Day celebration1http://www.arborday.org/programs/treeCityUSA/about.cfm2http://www.arborday.org/programs/treeCityUSA/standards.cfm
Tree City USA
Measuring Success at 40 Years
• Does participation in the Tree City USA program lead to sustainable urban forests and stronger communities?3
• To answer this question, we propose conducting a program evaluation.
3 adapted from http://www.arborday.org/programs/treeCityUSA/documents/promo.pdf
TCUSA Program Literature Review
• Only one study examining program outcomes– Galvin & Bleil examined tree canopy quantity and
community demographics in MD4
• Correlation study• Compared participants v. non-participants• Found participation as predictor of canopy cover• But, city land area was a stronger predictor
• Study only examined one potential outcome of participation: increased canopy cover4Galvin, M.F. & D. Bleil. (2004). Relationship among tree canopy quantity, community
demographics, and Tree City USA program participation in Maryland. U.S. Journal of Arboriculture 30.6: 321-327.
What is Program Evaluation?
• “Evaluation is the systematic application of scientific methods to assess the design, implementation, improvement or outcomes of a program (Rossi & Freeman, 1993; Short, et. al. 1996).”
• “The term "program" may include any organized action such as media campaigns, service provision, educational services, public policies, research projects,
etc. (Center for Disease Control and Prevention [CDC], 1999).”5
5Medical University of South Carolina. Web. 26 Sept 2014. https://mainweb-v.musc.edu/vawprevention/research/programeval.shtml
What is Program Evaluation cont.
• Types of evaluations– Process– Impact– Outcome
• Emphasis on “cause” rather than “correlation” and “outcomes” rather than “outputs”
• Questions to ask when planning an evaluation– What is the purpose of
the evaluation?– What outcomes,
impacts, or process should be looked at?
– What data exists?– How will the data be
analyzed?
Identifying TCUSA Outcomes
• Identifying appropriate outcomes is a key factor in program evaluation
• We’ve identified 4 categories of possible outcomes:– Group 1: Ecosystem Services– Group 2: Financial– Group 3: Community– Group 4: Institutional
Ecosystem Services Outcomes
• Air Quality– Removal of particulates and other criteria air
pollutants6
• Stormwater Runoff– Reduction of runoff and sewer overflow7
• CO2 sequestration– Urban trees in the U.S. have “an annual
carbon sequestration rate of 22.8 million tons per year”76Nowak, D.J. & J.F. Dwyer. (2000). Understanding the benefits and costs of urban forest
ecosystems. In: Kuser, John E., ed. Handbook of urban and community forestry in the Northeat. New York, NY: Kluwer Academics/Plenum: 11-227Alliance for Community Trees. 2011. “Benefits of Trees and Urban Forests: A Research List.
Financial Outcomes
• Property values– Increased residential
property values7
• Business – Consumer behavior8
• Jobs– Availability of green
industry and municipal forest management7
• Energy Efficiency– Decreased heating
and cooling costs7
8Wolf, Kathleen L. 2005. “Trees in the Small City Retail Business District: Comparing Resident and Visitor Perceptions.” Journal of Forestry: 390-395
Community Outcomes
• Safety– Decreased violence and crime7
– Traffic control9
• Public Health– Effects on mental and physical health7
• Connectivity – Increased unity and cohesion7
9 Mok, Jeong-Hun, Harlow C. Landphair, and Jody R. Naderi.2006. “Landscape Improvement Impacts on Roadside Safety in Texas.” Landscape and Urban Planning 78.3: 263-74.
Institutional Outcomes
• Formation of new organizations
• Connections between organizations
• Outreach activities
Conclusion
• Take Home Lesson: – Consider program evaluation for your
organization
• Moving forward:– Providing measurable outcomes for Arbor Day
to consider in evaluating TCUSA
Share Your Ideas
• We would like you, as practitioners in community forestry, to identify measurable outcomes
• Write your ideas for outcomes on the four flipcharts around the room
• Or, tweet your ideas to #PCF2014